Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:05:59.734Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gas vs dust radial extent in disks: the importance of their thermal interplay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 September 2018

Stefano Facchini Open the ORCID record for Stefano Facchini [Opens in a new window]
Stefano Facchini*
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Extraterrestrische Physik, Giessenbachstrasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A key parameter governing the secular evolution of protoplanetary disks is their outer radius. In this paper, the feedback of realistic dust grain size distributions onto the gas emission is investigated. Models predict that the difference of dust and gas extents as traced by CO is primarily caused by differences in the optical depth of lines vs continuum. The main effect of radial drift is the sharp decrease in the intensity profile at the outer edge. The gas radial extent can easily range within a factor of 2 for models with different turbulence. A combination of grain growth and vertical settling leads to thermal de-coupling between gas and dust at intermediate scale-heights. A proper treatment of the gas thermal structure within dust gaps will be fundamental to disentangle surface density gaps from gas temperature gaps.

Keywords

astrochemistry – planetary systems: protoplanetary disks – planetary systems: planet-disk interactions – submillimeter: planetary systems
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 13 , Symposium S332: Astrochemistry VII: Through the Cosmos from Galaxies to Planets , March 2017 , pp. 129 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2018 

References

ALMA Partnership, Brogan, C. L., Pérez, L. M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 808, L3Google Scholar
Andrews, S. M., Wilner, D. J., Hughes, A. M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 744, 162Google Scholar
Bai, X.-N., 2016, ApJ, 821, 80Google Scholar
Birnstiel, T. & Andrews, S. M., 2014, ApJ, 780, 153Google Scholar
Birnstiel, T., Andrews, S. M., Pinilla, P., & Kama, M., 2015, ApJ, 813, L14Google Scholar
Bruderer, S., van Dishoeck, E. F., Doty, S. D., & Herczeg, G. J., 2012, A&A, 541, A91Google Scholar
Bruderer, S., 2013, A&A, 559, A46Google Scholar
Cleeves, L. I., 2016, ApJ, 816, L21Google Scholar
Collings, M. P., Dever, J. W., Fraser, H. J., McCoustra, M. R. S., & Williams, D. A., 2003, ApJ, 583, 1058Google Scholar
de Gregorio-Monsalvo, I., Ménard, F., Dent, W., et al. 2013, A&A, 557, A133Google Scholar
Dubrulle, B., Morfill, G., & Sterzik, M., 1995, Icarus, 114, 237Google Scholar
Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., Prato, L., et al. 1998, A&A, 338, L63Google Scholar
Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., Piétu, V., et al. 2017, arXiv:1706.02608Google Scholar
Facchini, S., Birnstiel, T., Bruderer, S., & van Dishoeck, E. F. 2017a, A&A in press, arXiv:1705.06235Google Scholar
Facchini, S., Pinilla, P., van Dishoeck, E. F., & de Juan Ovelar, M. 2017b, A&A submittedGoogle Scholar
Fedele, D., Carney, M., Hogerheijde, M. R., et al. 2017, A&A, 600, A72Google Scholar
Guilloteau, S. & Dutrey, A., 1998, A&A, 339, 467Google Scholar
Huang, J., Öberg, K. I., & Andrews, S. M., 2016, ApJ, 823, L18Google Scholar
Isella, A., Guidi, G., Testi, L., et al. 2016, Physical Review Letters, 117, 251101Google Scholar
Lynden-Bell, D. & Pringle, J. E., 1974, MNRAS, 168, 603Google Scholar
Mordasini, C., Alibert, Y., Benz, W., Klahr, H., & Henning, T., 2012, A&A, 541, A97Google Scholar
Pérez, L. M., Carpenter, J. M., Andrews, S. M., et al. 2016, Science, 353, 1519Google Scholar
Piétu, V., Guilloteau, S., Di Folco, E., Dutrey, A., & Boehler, Y., 2014, A&A, 564, A95Google Scholar
Salinas, V. N., Hogerheijde, M. R., Mathews, G. S., et al. 2017, arXiv:1707.06475Google Scholar
Schwarz, K. R., Bergin, E. A., Cleeves, L. I., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 91Google Scholar
Shakura, N. I. & Sunyaev, R. A., 1973, A&A, 24, 337Google Scholar
Tazzari, M., Testi, L., Natta, A., et al. 2017, A&A in press, arXiv:1707.01499Google Scholar
Teague, R., Semenov, D., Gorti, U., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 228Google Scholar
Tripathi, A., Andrews, S. M., Birnstiel, T., & Wilner, D. J. 2017, ApJ in press, arXiv:1706.08977Google Scholar
van der Marel, N., van Dishoeck, E. F., Bruderer, S., et al. 2013, Science, 340, 1199Google Scholar
Vasyunin, A. I., Wiebe, D. S., Birnstiel, T., et al. 2011, ApJ, 727, 76Google Scholar